REVIEW 1 cited by
WikiCausal: Corpus and Evaluation Framework for Causal Knowledge Graph Construction
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
WikiCausal: Corpus and Evaluation Framework for Causal Knowledge Graph Construction
read the original abstract
Recently, there has been an increasing interest in the construction of general-domain and domain-specific causal knowledge graphs. Such knowledge graphs enable reasoning for causal analysis and event prediction, and so have a range of applications across different domains. While great progress has been made toward automated construction of causal knowledge graphs, the evaluation of such solutions has either focused on low-level tasks (e.g., cause-effect phrase extraction) or on ad hoc evaluation data and small manual evaluations. In this paper, we present a corpus, task, and evaluation framework for causal knowledge graph construction. Our corpus consists of Wikipedia articles for a collection of event-related concepts in Wikidata. The task is to extract causal relations between event concepts from the corpus. The evaluation is performed in part using existing causal relations in Wikidata to measure recall, and in part using Large Language Models to avoid the need for manual or crowd-sourced evaluation. We evaluate a pipeline for causal knowledge graph construction that relies on neural models for question answering and concept linking, and show how the corpus and the evaluation framework allow us to effectively find the right model for each task. The corpus and the evaluation framework are publicly available.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Reasoning Consensus: Structural Ensembling of LLM Reasoning via Weighted DAG Aggregation
Combining multiple LLMs' reasoning traces into weighted DAGs gives an auditable consensus graph that matches self-consistency and modestly improves on majority voting.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.